This film uses the six week study of four scientists in a Bolivian national park a back drop for a discussion on species extinction. The documentary evaluates the accuracy of the Species-Area Relationship. Opposing scientists, statisticians claim that anecdotal evidence, like field observations, are not viable indicators of increased extinction rates. Some wonder if there is an extinction crises at all.
Matrix of Sustainability Problems
Nature's Numbers does not to a good job in illustrating the matrix of sustainability problems. Some connections could be made between the effects of logging on the park, and interestingly how additional park land in Brazil could benefit the park in Bolivia. Another connection made by the view is the similarity of how overgrowth from land that was previously logged lacks biodiversity just as "reclaimed" land from mountain top removal projects lacks biodiversity.
Persuasive and Compelling (and not)
There were not many persuasive or compelling moments in this film. The examples of the small mangrove island tests and the fragmented forests with edge effect were interesting but not compelling.
Two aspects of the film were clearly not compelling in the viewer's eyes. The first is the scene of Tom Cruise yelling, "Have you planted a tree? Do it!" It added nothing to the argument trying to be made. The second aspect is the cutaways to the researchers' personal thoughts about the expedition, commenting about how they are anxious to go home, etc. This too did not add to the content of the documentary.
Environmental Education Value
The film does have value though. It shows how it is difficult enough to have four researcher survey the park; so trying to cover the planet with experts is a daunting and near impossible task. This is why modelling is widely used. Unfortunately, modelling can be flawed, and the topic of species extinction is simply too complex for agreements to be easy made.
Nature's Numbers: Assessing Species Extinction
(1994) Director: Zam BarringCentral Argument/Narrative
This film uses the six week study of four scientists in a Bolivian national park a back drop for a discussion on species extinction. The documentary evaluates the accuracy of the Species-Area Relationship. Opposing scientists, statisticians claim that anecdotal evidence, like field observations, are not viable indicators of increased extinction rates. Some wonder if there is an extinction crises at all.Matrix of Sustainability Problems
Nature's Numbers does not to a good job in illustrating the matrix of sustainability problems. Some connections could be made between the effects of logging on the park, and interestingly how additional park land in Brazil could benefit the park in Bolivia. Another connection made by the view is the similarity of how overgrowth from land that was previously logged lacks biodiversity just as "reclaimed" land from mountain top removal projects lacks biodiversity.Persuasive and Compelling (and not)
There were not many persuasive or compelling moments in this film. The examples of the small mangrove island tests and the fragmented forests with edge effect were interesting but not compelling.Two aspects of the film were clearly not compelling in the viewer's eyes. The first is the scene of Tom Cruise yelling, "Have you planted a tree? Do it!" It added nothing to the argument trying to be made. The second aspect is the cutaways to the researchers' personal thoughts about the expedition, commenting about how they are anxious to go home, etc. This too did not add to the content of the documentary.
Environmental Education Value
The film does have value though. It shows how it is difficult enough to have four researcher survey the park; so trying to cover the planet with experts is a daunting and near impossible task. This is why modelling is widely used. Unfortunately, modelling can be flawed, and the topic of species extinction is simply too complex for agreements to be easy made.